A Really Important Question
-
A lot of people seem to be mostly interested in a pissing contest over who should take the blame for the mess of Katrina. But take a critical look, not at the preventative measures that could have been taken, but rather only at the response that was mounted after the disaster had indeed become a reality. I believe that it is hard for a person not blinded by their particular political and ideological persuasion to disagree that the post-disaster response that has been mounted has been characterized by a disturbing level of, uhmm, shall we say, "ineptness". We have had almost 4 years since 911 of living in a world where every person is acutely aware that a terrorist catastrophe can occur on our own soil. Now, given the recent test of our ability to respond to a catastrophe involving on the order of roughly 100,000, where we had advance warning to boot, what does that tell us about our ability to respond to something like a dirty bomb exploded in a metropolitan area with millions of citizens and no warning???
-
A lot of people seem to be mostly interested in a pissing contest over who should take the blame for the mess of Katrina. But take a critical look, not at the preventative measures that could have been taken, but rather only at the response that was mounted after the disaster had indeed become a reality. I believe that it is hard for a person not blinded by their particular political and ideological persuasion to disagree that the post-disaster response that has been mounted has been characterized by a disturbing level of, uhmm, shall we say, "ineptness". We have had almost 4 years since 911 of living in a world where every person is acutely aware that a terrorist catastrophe can occur on our own soil. Now, given the recent test of our ability to respond to a catastrophe involving on the order of roughly 100,000, where we had advance warning to boot, what does that tell us about our ability to respond to something like a dirty bomb exploded in a metropolitan area with millions of citizens and no warning???
rwestgraham wrote: what does that tell us about our ability to respond to something like a dirty bomb exploded in a metropolitan area with millions of citizens and no warning??? it tells us: we're fucked Cleek | Image Toolkits | Thumbnail maker
-
A lot of people seem to be mostly interested in a pissing contest over who should take the blame for the mess of Katrina. But take a critical look, not at the preventative measures that could have been taken, but rather only at the response that was mounted after the disaster had indeed become a reality. I believe that it is hard for a person not blinded by their particular political and ideological persuasion to disagree that the post-disaster response that has been mounted has been characterized by a disturbing level of, uhmm, shall we say, "ineptness". We have had almost 4 years since 911 of living in a world where every person is acutely aware that a terrorist catastrophe can occur on our own soil. Now, given the recent test of our ability to respond to a catastrophe involving on the order of roughly 100,000, where we had advance warning to boot, what does that tell us about our ability to respond to something like a dirty bomb exploded in a metropolitan area with millions of citizens and no warning???
rwestgraham wrote: A lot of people seem to be mostly interested in a pissing contest over who should take the blame for the mess of Katrina Well, no quite true. Go tread the threads. Those on the subject started by probable US citizens are by design intended to take a bash at Bush, the administration or in the most ignorant, a shot a Bush's mother - a woman of advanced years who simply made an honest observation. Those threads on the subject started outside the country were far different, either offering an observation (as with K(arl)) or a question in a nonbiased manner. rwestgraham wrote: But take a critical look, not at the preventative measures that could have been taken Why? If the correct preventative measures had been taken there would be little need for further discussion. New Orleans citizens were told by their local and state leaders that they were own their own. Meanwhile nearly 700 city and school district buses sat idle. 700 times 50 passengers = 35,000 fewer horror stories, assuming the morons who ran the city /state only made one run. rwestgraham wrote: the post-disaster response that has been mounted has been characterized by a disturbing level of, uhmm, shall we say, "ineptness". to quote Chris L, "cite". rwestgraham wrote: what does that tell us about our ability to respond to something like a dirty bomb exploded in a metropolitan area with millions of citizens and no warning??? we're in deep shit as long as we have weak politicians in local leadership positions. If you want to look at the picture in the light you're attempting to place it, contrast 9-11 with New Orleans debacle. The difference was in the quality of local and state leadership. Oh, and guess what. New York State and New York City were run by Republicians. D'oh. Have another drink of kool aid. Mike "liberals were driven crazy by Bush." Me To: Dixie Sluts, M. Moore, the Boss, Bon Jovi, Clooney, Penn, Babs, Soros, Redford, Gore, Daschle - "bye bye" Me "I voted for W." Me "There you go again." RR "Flushed the Johns" Me -- modified at 19:59 Thursday 8th September, 2005
-
A lot of people seem to be mostly interested in a pissing contest over who should take the blame for the mess of Katrina. But take a critical look, not at the preventative measures that could have been taken, but rather only at the response that was mounted after the disaster had indeed become a reality. I believe that it is hard for a person not blinded by their particular political and ideological persuasion to disagree that the post-disaster response that has been mounted has been characterized by a disturbing level of, uhmm, shall we say, "ineptness". We have had almost 4 years since 911 of living in a world where every person is acutely aware that a terrorist catastrophe can occur on our own soil. Now, given the recent test of our ability to respond to a catastrophe involving on the order of roughly 100,000, where we had advance warning to boot, what does that tell us about our ability to respond to something like a dirty bomb exploded in a metropolitan area with millions of citizens and no warning???
rwestgraham wrote: Now, given the recent test of our ability to respond to a catastrophe involving on the order of roughly 100,000, where we had advance warning to boot, what does that tell us about our ability to respond to something like a dirty bomb exploded in a metropolitan area with millions of citizens and no warning??? Nothing. :rolleyes: Oh, i suppose you could come up with some hypothetical scenario where, instead of a hurricane, New Orleans was hit by a dirty bomb. And in that make-believe scenario, you could make some predictions as to how well things would be delt with. But that would be pointless. New Orleans is gone, and the damage stretches far beyond that wretched city anyway.
-
rwestgraham wrote: A lot of people seem to be mostly interested in a pissing contest over who should take the blame for the mess of Katrina Well, no quite true. Go tread the threads. Those on the subject started by probable US citizens are by design intended to take a bash at Bush, the administration or in the most ignorant, a shot a Bush's mother - a woman of advanced years who simply made an honest observation. Those threads on the subject started outside the country were far different, either offering an observation (as with K(arl)) or a question in a nonbiased manner. rwestgraham wrote: But take a critical look, not at the preventative measures that could have been taken Why? If the correct preventative measures had been taken there would be little need for further discussion. New Orleans citizens were told by their local and state leaders that they were own their own. Meanwhile nearly 700 city and school district buses sat idle. 700 times 50 passengers = 35,000 fewer horror stories, assuming the morons who ran the city /state only made one run. rwestgraham wrote: the post-disaster response that has been mounted has been characterized by a disturbing level of, uhmm, shall we say, "ineptness". to quote Chris L, "cite". rwestgraham wrote: what does that tell us about our ability to respond to something like a dirty bomb exploded in a metropolitan area with millions of citizens and no warning??? we're in deep shit as long as we have weak politicians in local leadership positions. If you want to look at the picture in the light you're attempting to place it, contrast 9-11 with New Orleans debacle. The difference was in the quality of local and state leadership. Oh, and guess what. New York State and New York City were run by Republicians. D'oh. Have another drink of kool aid. Mike "liberals were driven crazy by Bush." Me To: Dixie Sluts, M. Moore, the Boss, Bon Jovi, Clooney, Penn, Babs, Soros, Redford, Gore, Daschle - "bye bye" Me "I voted for W." Me "There you go again." RR "Flushed the Johns" Me -- modified at 19:59 Thursday 8th September, 2005
Mike Gaskey wrote: we're in deep sh*t as long as we have weak politicians in local leadership positions. I would rephrase that: we're in deep shit as long as we have politicians and rely on their leadership. Marc My website Traceract Understanding Simple Data Binding Diary Of A CEO - Preface
-
rwestgraham wrote: A lot of people seem to be mostly interested in a pissing contest over who should take the blame for the mess of Katrina Well, no quite true. Go tread the threads. Those on the subject started by probable US citizens are by design intended to take a bash at Bush, the administration or in the most ignorant, a shot a Bush's mother - a woman of advanced years who simply made an honest observation. Those threads on the subject started outside the country were far different, either offering an observation (as with K(arl)) or a question in a nonbiased manner. rwestgraham wrote: But take a critical look, not at the preventative measures that could have been taken Why? If the correct preventative measures had been taken there would be little need for further discussion. New Orleans citizens were told by their local and state leaders that they were own their own. Meanwhile nearly 700 city and school district buses sat idle. 700 times 50 passengers = 35,000 fewer horror stories, assuming the morons who ran the city /state only made one run. rwestgraham wrote: the post-disaster response that has been mounted has been characterized by a disturbing level of, uhmm, shall we say, "ineptness". to quote Chris L, "cite". rwestgraham wrote: what does that tell us about our ability to respond to something like a dirty bomb exploded in a metropolitan area with millions of citizens and no warning??? we're in deep shit as long as we have weak politicians in local leadership positions. If you want to look at the picture in the light you're attempting to place it, contrast 9-11 with New Orleans debacle. The difference was in the quality of local and state leadership. Oh, and guess what. New York State and New York City were run by Republicians. D'oh. Have another drink of kool aid. Mike "liberals were driven crazy by Bush." Me To: Dixie Sluts, M. Moore, the Boss, Bon Jovi, Clooney, Penn, Babs, Soros, Redford, Gore, Daschle - "bye bye" Me "I voted for W." Me "There you go again." RR "Flushed the Johns" Me -- modified at 19:59 Thursday 8th September, 2005
Mike Gaskey wrote: we're in deep sh*t as long as we have weak politicians in local leadership positions. If you want to look at the picture in the light you're attempting to place it, contrast 9-11 with New Orleans debacle. The difference was in the quality of local and state leadership. Oh, and guess what. New York State and New York City were run by Republicians. D'oh. Still stuck on your political agenda, I see. Sigh. What makes you so sure that anyone who asks questions is a Democrat? I am a registered Republican, although I do not ever vote a party ticket. Actually, what I am really looking at is not a political debate, but rather how much can we depend upon Federal agencies for a rapid, effective response? Consider that if you happen to live in a large metropolitan area like Atlanta, where I live, then an event like a dirty bomb has not only severely crippled your local government, but also your state government. In such a scenario, the primary response probably has to be a Federal one.
-
rwestgraham wrote: A lot of people seem to be mostly interested in a pissing contest over who should take the blame for the mess of Katrina Well, no quite true. Go tread the threads. Those on the subject started by probable US citizens are by design intended to take a bash at Bush, the administration or in the most ignorant, a shot a Bush's mother - a woman of advanced years who simply made an honest observation. Those threads on the subject started outside the country were far different, either offering an observation (as with K(arl)) or a question in a nonbiased manner. rwestgraham wrote: But take a critical look, not at the preventative measures that could have been taken Why? If the correct preventative measures had been taken there would be little need for further discussion. New Orleans citizens were told by their local and state leaders that they were own their own. Meanwhile nearly 700 city and school district buses sat idle. 700 times 50 passengers = 35,000 fewer horror stories, assuming the morons who ran the city /state only made one run. rwestgraham wrote: the post-disaster response that has been mounted has been characterized by a disturbing level of, uhmm, shall we say, "ineptness". to quote Chris L, "cite". rwestgraham wrote: what does that tell us about our ability to respond to something like a dirty bomb exploded in a metropolitan area with millions of citizens and no warning??? we're in deep shit as long as we have weak politicians in local leadership positions. If you want to look at the picture in the light you're attempting to place it, contrast 9-11 with New Orleans debacle. The difference was in the quality of local and state leadership. Oh, and guess what. New York State and New York City were run by Republicians. D'oh. Have another drink of kool aid. Mike "liberals were driven crazy by Bush." Me To: Dixie Sluts, M. Moore, the Boss, Bon Jovi, Clooney, Penn, Babs, Soros, Redford, Gore, Daschle - "bye bye" Me "I voted for W." Me "There you go again." RR "Flushed the Johns" Me -- modified at 19:59 Thursday 8th September, 2005
Mike Gaskey wrote: If you want to look at the picture in the light you're attempting to place it, contrast 9-11 with New Orleans debacle. The difference was in the quality of local and state leadership. Oh, and guess what. New York State and New York City were run by Republicians. D'oh. Apples vs oranges. Terrorist attack (sudden, office buildings, caused by evil humans) vs Hurricane (anticipated, entire cities, caused by evil deity). I think it's more appropriate to compare FEMA's response to Hurricane Katrina[^] with their response to the Hurricanes of 2004[^] (which occurred prior to the 2004 election *wink* *wink*). Mike Gaskey wrote: Have another drink of kool aid. Sure, but mine is sweetened with the truth[^].
I cannot take anything the Bush administration does seriously. The corruption, the cynical disregard for humanity, the cronyism and incompetence, all wrapped in a slimey flag of ultra-marketed nationalism repulses me. -- consdubya from fark.com.
-
Mike Gaskey wrote: we're in deep sh*t as long as we have weak politicians in local leadership positions. I would rephrase that: we're in deep shit as long as we have politicians and rely on their leadership. Marc My website Traceract Understanding Simple Data Binding Diary Of A CEO - Preface
Marc Clifton wrote: we're in deep sh*t as long as we have politicians and rely on their leadership I have an extremely difficult time disagreeing, but I'd like a compromise. I think I would have been correct (or closer, anyway) if I had said, "professional politicians" - the bane of our existence. One of the things I have not seen discussed in any thread ever is a contrast between "professional politicians" and competent individuals who decide to serve their community (local, state, federal) by serving a term or two then going back to their normal life. I once worked for a guy in Texas, he lived in Austin, who was a consumate professional and had a career that cycled from academia, business, government. He would typically spend up to 4 years at a time in a position / sector then move on. Terrific leader. We need more of these type. But again, I have a hard time disagreeing. Thanks for the correction. Mike "liberals were driven crazy by Bush." Me To: Dixie Sluts, M. Moore, the Boss, Bon Jovi, Clooney, Penn, Babs, Soros, Redford, Gore, Daschle - "bye bye" Me "I voted for W." Me "There you go again." RR "Flushed the Johns" Me
-
rwestgraham wrote: A lot of people seem to be mostly interested in a pissing contest over who should take the blame for the mess of Katrina Well, no quite true. Go tread the threads. Those on the subject started by probable US citizens are by design intended to take a bash at Bush, the administration or in the most ignorant, a shot a Bush's mother - a woman of advanced years who simply made an honest observation. Those threads on the subject started outside the country were far different, either offering an observation (as with K(arl)) or a question in a nonbiased manner. rwestgraham wrote: But take a critical look, not at the preventative measures that could have been taken Why? If the correct preventative measures had been taken there would be little need for further discussion. New Orleans citizens were told by their local and state leaders that they were own their own. Meanwhile nearly 700 city and school district buses sat idle. 700 times 50 passengers = 35,000 fewer horror stories, assuming the morons who ran the city /state only made one run. rwestgraham wrote: the post-disaster response that has been mounted has been characterized by a disturbing level of, uhmm, shall we say, "ineptness". to quote Chris L, "cite". rwestgraham wrote: what does that tell us about our ability to respond to something like a dirty bomb exploded in a metropolitan area with millions of citizens and no warning??? we're in deep shit as long as we have weak politicians in local leadership positions. If you want to look at the picture in the light you're attempting to place it, contrast 9-11 with New Orleans debacle. The difference was in the quality of local and state leadership. Oh, and guess what. New York State and New York City were run by Republicians. D'oh. Have another drink of kool aid. Mike "liberals were driven crazy by Bush." Me To: Dixie Sluts, M. Moore, the Boss, Bon Jovi, Clooney, Penn, Babs, Soros, Redford, Gore, Daschle - "bye bye" Me "I voted for W." Me "There you go again." RR "Flushed the Johns" Me -- modified at 19:59 Thursday 8th September, 2005
Mike Gaskey wrote: New York State and New York City were run by Republicians. D'oh. :laugh: yes, pro-choice, pro-gay-rights Republicans who welcome multiculturalism, who don't pander to the religious right, aren't afraid of taxes, and don't give a crap about the majority of the rest of the inane things the rest of the GOP salivates over... in any other state (except CA and new england), guys like Pataki and Rudy G would be, gasp, Democrats. Cleek | Image Toolkits | Thumbnail maker
-
Marc Clifton wrote: we're in deep sh*t as long as we have politicians and rely on their leadership I have an extremely difficult time disagreeing, but I'd like a compromise. I think I would have been correct (or closer, anyway) if I had said, "professional politicians" - the bane of our existence. One of the things I have not seen discussed in any thread ever is a contrast between "professional politicians" and competent individuals who decide to serve their community (local, state, federal) by serving a term or two then going back to their normal life. I once worked for a guy in Texas, he lived in Austin, who was a consumate professional and had a career that cycled from academia, business, government. He would typically spend up to 4 years at a time in a position / sector then move on. Terrific leader. We need more of these type. But again, I have a hard time disagreeing. Thanks for the correction. Mike "liberals were driven crazy by Bush." Me To: Dixie Sluts, M. Moore, the Boss, Bon Jovi, Clooney, Penn, Babs, Soros, Redford, Gore, Daschle - "bye bye" Me "I voted for W." Me "There you go again." RR "Flushed the Johns" Me
Mike Gaskey wrote: One of the things I have not seen discussed in any thread ever is a contrast between "professional politicians" and competent individuals who decide to serve their community (local, state, federal) by serving a term or two then going back to their normal life. I think you bring up a good point. Any mass of people definitely benefits from a few people that take a strong leadership position and "get things done", otherwise chaos reigns. Hmmm... I think what surprises me the most about this whole situation is how easily people expect to be rescued by "the system" and how quickly they put blame on their leaders when the system fails. I have yet to read about a single story in which a local nobody rallied his neighbors/community to the benefit of the group. It seems more that it was a free-for-all where no one gave a damn about anyone else. That's the thing that saddens me the most. Marc My website Traceract Understanding Simple Data Binding Diary Of A CEO - Preface
-
rwestgraham wrote: Now, given the recent test of our ability to respond to a catastrophe involving on the order of roughly 100,000, where we had advance warning to boot, what does that tell us about our ability to respond to something like a dirty bomb exploded in a metropolitan area with millions of citizens and no warning??? Nothing. :rolleyes: Oh, i suppose you could come up with some hypothetical scenario where, instead of a hurricane, New Orleans was hit by a dirty bomb. And in that make-believe scenario, you could make some predictions as to how well things would be delt with. But that would be pointless. New Orleans is gone, and the damage stretches far beyond that wretched city anyway.
Shog9 wrote: that wretched city WTF ? Cleek | Image Toolkits | Thumbnail maker
-
Mike Gaskey wrote: we're in deep sh*t as long as we have weak politicians in local leadership positions. If you want to look at the picture in the light you're attempting to place it, contrast 9-11 with New Orleans debacle. The difference was in the quality of local and state leadership. Oh, and guess what. New York State and New York City were run by Republicians. D'oh. Still stuck on your political agenda, I see. Sigh. What makes you so sure that anyone who asks questions is a Democrat? I am a registered Republican, although I do not ever vote a party ticket. Actually, what I am really looking at is not a political debate, but rather how much can we depend upon Federal agencies for a rapid, effective response? Consider that if you happen to live in a large metropolitan area like Atlanta, where I live, then an event like a dirty bomb has not only severely crippled your local government, but also your state government. In such a scenario, the primary response probably has to be a Federal one.
rwestgraham wrote: Actually, what I am really looking at is not a political debate, but rather how much can we depend upon Federal agencies for a rapid, effective response? You can't and shouldn't. FEMA, for example, consists of 2,500 people. An organization designed to coordinate, period. To coordinate they need the cooperation of local officials because based on our system of givernment they can't really do anything until asked, then only if the locals cooperate. rwestgraham wrote: Sigh. What makes you so sure that anyone who asks questions is a Democrat? I don't. Have you asked why Hillary voted to fold FEMA into Homeland Security and now complains that it is ineffective because it is a part of Homeland Security? Yes, I know you said you're a registered Republican. I've also read your threads and you have a liberal bias and are so anti-Bush you're willing to take a shot at his mother. I find that despicible. rwestgraham wrote: Consider that if you happen to live in a large metropolitan area like Atlanta, where I live, then an event like a dirty bomb has not only severely crippled your local government, but also your state government. In such a scenario, the primary response probably has to be a Federal one. Read the Lord of the Flies. Own a firearm. Make sure you have a store of food and water. Mike "liberals were driven crazy by Bush." Me To: Dixie Sluts, M. Moore, the Boss, Bon Jovi, Clooney, Penn, Babs, Soros, Redford, Gore, Daschle - "bye bye" Me "I voted for W." Me "There you go again." RR "Flushed the Johns" Me K(arl) wrote: Date:8:50 23 Feb '05 I love you.
-
Mike Gaskey wrote: New York State and New York City were run by Republicians. D'oh. :laugh: yes, pro-choice, pro-gay-rights Republicans who welcome multiculturalism, who don't pander to the religious right, aren't afraid of taxes, and don't give a crap about the majority of the rest of the inane things the rest of the GOP salivates over... in any other state (except CA and new england), guys like Pataki and Rudy G would be, gasp, Democrats. Cleek | Image Toolkits | Thumbnail maker
Chris Losinger wrote: in any other state (except CA and new england), guys like Pataki and Rudy G would be, gasp, Democrats. JFK Democrats. Just as there are (Reid, Dean, Pelosi, Boxer, Waters, Rangel, etc.) lefties that make it uncomfortable for the likes of Bayh, Leibermann, and a few others we have our far right that make it uncomfortable for the Gulianis and Patakis. But what is your point? The facts remain, 9-11 was effectively handled by people labelled as Republicans and Katrina-New Orleans was mishandled by people labelled as Democrats. Mike "liberals were driven crazy by Bush." Me To: Dixie Sluts, M. Moore, the Boss, Bon Jovi, Clooney, Penn, Babs, Soros, Redford, Gore, Daschle - "bye bye" Me "I voted for W." Me "There you go again." RR "Flushed the Johns" Me
-
rwestgraham wrote: Actually, what I am really looking at is not a political debate, but rather how much can we depend upon Federal agencies for a rapid, effective response? You can't and shouldn't. FEMA, for example, consists of 2,500 people. An organization designed to coordinate, period. To coordinate they need the cooperation of local officials because based on our system of givernment they can't really do anything until asked, then only if the locals cooperate. rwestgraham wrote: Sigh. What makes you so sure that anyone who asks questions is a Democrat? I don't. Have you asked why Hillary voted to fold FEMA into Homeland Security and now complains that it is ineffective because it is a part of Homeland Security? Yes, I know you said you're a registered Republican. I've also read your threads and you have a liberal bias and are so anti-Bush you're willing to take a shot at his mother. I find that despicible. rwestgraham wrote: Consider that if you happen to live in a large metropolitan area like Atlanta, where I live, then an event like a dirty bomb has not only severely crippled your local government, but also your state government. In such a scenario, the primary response probably has to be a Federal one. Read the Lord of the Flies. Own a firearm. Make sure you have a store of food and water. Mike "liberals were driven crazy by Bush." Me To: Dixie Sluts, M. Moore, the Boss, Bon Jovi, Clooney, Penn, Babs, Soros, Redford, Gore, Daschle - "bye bye" Me "I voted for W." Me "There you go again." RR "Flushed the Johns" Me K(arl) wrote: Date:8:50 23 Feb '05 I love you.
Mike Gaskey wrote: Read the Lord of the Flies. Good movie, but I guess book is much better. Never forget: "Stay kul and happy" (I.A.)
David's thoughts / dnhsoftware.org / MyHTMLTidy -
rwestgraham wrote: Actually, what I am really looking at is not a political debate, but rather how much can we depend upon Federal agencies for a rapid, effective response? You can't and shouldn't. FEMA, for example, consists of 2,500 people. An organization designed to coordinate, period. To coordinate they need the cooperation of local officials because based on our system of givernment they can't really do anything until asked, then only if the locals cooperate. rwestgraham wrote: Sigh. What makes you so sure that anyone who asks questions is a Democrat? I don't. Have you asked why Hillary voted to fold FEMA into Homeland Security and now complains that it is ineffective because it is a part of Homeland Security? Yes, I know you said you're a registered Republican. I've also read your threads and you have a liberal bias and are so anti-Bush you're willing to take a shot at his mother. I find that despicible. rwestgraham wrote: Consider that if you happen to live in a large metropolitan area like Atlanta, where I live, then an event like a dirty bomb has not only severely crippled your local government, but also your state government. In such a scenario, the primary response probably has to be a Federal one. Read the Lord of the Flies. Own a firearm. Make sure you have a store of food and water. Mike "liberals were driven crazy by Bush." Me To: Dixie Sluts, M. Moore, the Boss, Bon Jovi, Clooney, Penn, Babs, Soros, Redford, Gore, Daschle - "bye bye" Me "I voted for W." Me "There you go again." RR "Flushed the Johns" Me K(arl) wrote: Date:8:50 23 Feb '05 I love you.
Mike Gaskey wrote: You can't and shouldn't. FEMA, for example, consists of 2,500 people. An organization designed to coordinate, period. To coordinate they need the cooperation of local officials because based on our system of givernment they can't really do anything until asked, then only if the locals cooperate. But what happens if the local officials are no longer there to coordinate with? Are you saying that despite the fact that we all pay federal taxes, we should not expect our federal government to have the ability to act effectively in response to any crisis? Why do we call it "Homeland Security", and not "Federal Government Security"? Mike Gaskey wrote: Yes, I know you said you're a registered Republican. I've also read your threads and you have a liberal bias and are so anti-Bush you're willing to take a shot at his mother. I find that despicible. No. Barbara made her assinine, demeaning comments all on her own. She did not need any help from me!! LOL!! [EDIT] Besides SHE made her comments on PUBLIC radio. You know, I really don't give a fat fuck who she is - anyone who speaks on public radio is fair game for criticism. Even Bush's mom. Unless you belive in Communism or something? [/EDIT] But you are right about one thing. I don't like Bush. And I have a good reason. Since 2001 he has increased our Federal deficit by almost 4.5 TRILLION dollars, and in the process also doled out a lot of rhetoric about making us "safer". I would like to know just exactly how he has made me "safer"? And as part of 4.5 trillion dollars of deficit spending, yes I think agencies like FEMA should be able to respond like a well oiled machine! If we should not expect to depend upon the Federal government in any sort of catastrophic emergency as you and other suggest, that is fine with me. But if that is the case, I would like to see the post 911 hemorrhage of deficit spending brought under control. If not, I want to see something for my money. -- modified at 22:27 Thursday 8th September, 2005
-
Mike Gaskey wrote: One of the things I have not seen discussed in any thread ever is a contrast between "professional politicians" and competent individuals who decide to serve their community (local, state, federal) by serving a term or two then going back to their normal life. I think you bring up a good point. Any mass of people definitely benefits from a few people that take a strong leadership position and "get things done", otherwise chaos reigns. Hmmm... I think what surprises me the most about this whole situation is how easily people expect to be rescued by "the system" and how quickly they put blame on their leaders when the system fails. I have yet to read about a single story in which a local nobody rallied his neighbors/community to the benefit of the group. It seems more that it was a free-for-all where no one gave a damn about anyone else. That's the thing that saddens me the most. Marc My website Traceract Understanding Simple Data Binding Diary Of A CEO - Preface
Marc Clifton wrote: I have yet to read about a single story in which a local nobody rallied his neighbors/community to the benefit of the group. I've seen a couple of good stories, FoxNews has reported a couple of such heroics. No a lot, but some. Marc Clifton wrote: I think what surprises me the most about this whole situation is how easily people expect to be rescued by "the system" In many regards, we've lost touch with what I believe to be our roots. By that I mean the country always had a sense of self-reliance, at least through the 70's. We've gone from neighbors, church members, co-workers, etc. - lending a helping hand, to holding our hands out, the nanny-state populated by children who expect to be taken care of. Mike "liberals were driven crazy by Bush." Me To: Dixie Sluts, M. Moore, the Boss, Bon Jovi, Clooney, Penn, Babs, Soros, Redford, Gore, Daschle - "bye bye" Me "I voted for W." Me "There you go again." RR "Flushed the Johns" Me K(arl) wrote: Date:8:50 23 Feb '05 I love you.
-
Shog9 wrote: that wretched city WTF ? Cleek | Image Toolkits | Thumbnail maker
First definition.
-
Chris Losinger wrote: in any other state (except CA and new england), guys like Pataki and Rudy G would be, gasp, Democrats. JFK Democrats. Just as there are (Reid, Dean, Pelosi, Boxer, Waters, Rangel, etc.) lefties that make it uncomfortable for the likes of Bayh, Leibermann, and a few others we have our far right that make it uncomfortable for the Gulianis and Patakis. But what is your point? The facts remain, 9-11 was effectively handled by people labelled as Republicans and Katrina-New Orleans was mishandled by people labelled as Democrats. Mike "liberals were driven crazy by Bush." Me To: Dixie Sluts, M. Moore, the Boss, Bon Jovi, Clooney, Penn, Babs, Soros, Redford, Gore, Daschle - "bye bye" Me "I voted for W." Me "There you go again." RR "Flushed the Johns" Me
Mike Gaskey wrote: we have our far right that make it uncomfortable for the Gulianis and Patakis. uncomfortable? they ruin the whole fucking party. seriously. get rid of the theocrats and bigots and keep (errr... get back to) the fiscal responsibilty and you've got yourself a real attractive party. as it is now, the GOP is completely poisoned. Mike Gaskey wrote: The facts remain, 9-11 was effectively handled by people labelled as Republicans and Katrina-New Orleans was mishandled by people labelled as Democrats ah. as long as the right label wins, regardless of what the people actually stand for, it's all good. go team! Cleek | Image Toolkits | Thumbnail maker -- modified at 8:00 Friday 9th September, 2005
-
First definition.
the word has connotations well beyond that definition. Cleek | Image Toolkits | Thumbnail maker
-
Marc Clifton wrote: I have yet to read about a single story in which a local nobody rallied his neighbors/community to the benefit of the group. I've seen a couple of good stories, FoxNews has reported a couple of such heroics. No a lot, but some. Marc Clifton wrote: I think what surprises me the most about this whole situation is how easily people expect to be rescued by "the system" In many regards, we've lost touch with what I believe to be our roots. By that I mean the country always had a sense of self-reliance, at least through the 70's. We've gone from neighbors, church members, co-workers, etc. - lending a helping hand, to holding our hands out, the nanny-state populated by children who expect to be taken care of. Mike "liberals were driven crazy by Bush." Me To: Dixie Sluts, M. Moore, the Boss, Bon Jovi, Clooney, Penn, Babs, Soros, Redford, Gore, Daschle - "bye bye" Me "I voted for W." Me "There you go again." RR "Flushed the Johns" Me K(arl) wrote: Date:8:50 23 Feb '05 I love you.
Mike Gaskey wrote: By that I mean the country always had a sense of self-reliance Indeed. For some reason I keep thinking of 100 years ago when people living in the middle of nowhere had to rely only on themselves and their neighbors. Though, I guess my John Wayne image of this is certainly far from reality--many of these adventurers ended up dead! Maybe modern people just don't know how to rely on themselves anymore. They've gotten so comfortable at relying on the support system around them that they totally freak out when that system breaks down. The psychologists are going to have a field day, I'll wager. Marc My website Traceract Understanding Simple Data Binding Diary Of A CEO - Preface